History of Mediaeval Hindu India (being a History of India from 600 to 1200 A.D.) v2.c28.s1.22

v2.c28.s1.22

With these preliminary remarks we now proceed to discuss the cogency of the particular arguments adduced by Dr. Bhandarkar to prove that the four supposed Agnikula tribes were Gujars who were allied to the Huns and therefore foreigners. It is necessary at the outset to say that because a tribe is mentioned along with another and foreign tribe in any connection, therefore it does not follow that the first tribe is also a foreign tribe. Because Bāṇa says in Harsha-charita that Pratāpavardhana the Thanesar king conquered the Huns and also the Gujars, therefore it would be absurd to argue that the Gujars were a foreign tribe allied to the Huns and came to India along with them. On this evidently fallacious argument Dr. Bhandarkar tries to prove that the Haihayas also were foreigners, simply because they are mentioned in the Purāṇas along with foreigners. "As the Haihayas are classed (?) with Śakas, the Yavanas, the Pāradas, the Kāmbojas there can be little doubt that they were regarded as Mlechchhas at about the 4th century A. D. when the Harivaṃśa was composed" (p. 19). This is certainly illogical, for we must have a distinct statement to hold that the Haihayas were themselves regarded as Mlechchhas. Though they might have taken the aid of Mlechchhas in their wars, they themselves cannot thereby become Mlechchhas. But the case of the Haihayas is still stronger. For the Harivaṃśa itself and all the Purāṇas agree in stating that the Haihayas and their ancient king Sahasrārjuna were Aryans belonging to the Lunar Vamśa. Not only this, throughout Indian history and down to the present time the Haihayas are treated as some of the best Kshatriyas. As shown in our first Volume (p. 345) their anthropometrical characteristics are also distinctly Aryan*. While again the Haihayas are distinctly Aryans and are treated as Aryans and the best Kshatriyas, the Huns were distinctly mentioned as foreigners and were treated as foreigners by the orthodox Hindus. A Kshatriya recorded as marrying a Hūṇa princess in ancient days no more makes a Hun an Indian and a Kshatriya than a Native prince in these days marrying a Spanish lady makes the Spanish, Indians or Kshatriyas. The Huns were never treated as one of the 36 Royal families as we have already shown in our note and Dr. Bhandarkar like many others is mistaken in looking upon them as Kshatriyas. With these unavoidable further preliminary observations which are, however, necessary, we proceed to examine one by one the case of the four Agnikulas whom Dr. Bhandarkar believes to have been Gujar.